One of the many smart observations in Tom Bethell’s new book, Darwin’s House of Cards, pertains to the curious relationship of Darwinism and Creationism — and how that bears on efforts to suppress investigation of the theory of intelligent design.
Darwinists seem to long for the good old days when their only opposition was from Biblical creationism. This is reflected in efforts to conflate ID with creationism, or to make the former a kind of forbidden science, off limits to discussion. As Bethell writes in his chapter on “Intelligent Design and Information Theory”:
Darwinians today are eager to stick their own labels onto ID: “Intelligent design creationism” is one favorite. It’s as though an unseen collective voice had cried out: “Give us back our preferred enemy! Bring back creationism! That, we knew how to respond to.” But so far, no intelligent rebuttal of intelligent design has appeared.
The longing, the romance — perhaps “bromance”? — makes sense, since for all that separates them, Darwinism and creationism have in common that they are both inferences from prior doctrines (respectively, materialism, or a particular way of reading the Bible). ID is different. Says Bethell, “Intelligent design is not a deduction from a philosophy but an inference from observed facts.”
Of course, there are no ‘brute facts’ that merely need to be interpreted ‘rationally’.
It’s better to say that Intelligent Design advocates are unwilling to expend the energy and make the intellectual compromises needed to tolerate the illogical (when not fallacious and fraudulent) claims of Darwinism.
As such, ID men — without the felt need to defend the tottering pillar of materialistic atheism — can simply draw the necessary inferences and deductions, easily uncovered from the world around them.
It should be noted that classic young earth creationism — while strongly tied to the Bible — wasn’t really the enemy that Darwin was attacking. Even in the 19th century, it was only one of many beliefs about the origin of the world: the solid majority of intellectuals (and probably the priests and pastors as well) preferred the Greco-Roman compromise of Natural Law.
(Yes, even in ‘the good old days’, men quietly despised the Mosaic Law. This most definitely includes many religious men as well.)
What Darwin struck out against, his primary target, was Natural Law. Nobody wanted Christ to rule: Darwin hated the very concept of any Lord, any God, above the will of Men.
(…which really means “above and outside the power of the Right Sort… the Power Elite… the Will of the State!”)
Now, Darwinism is dying. It remains sustained by government-subsided academia, rooted in the middle age tradition of the academic guild and the profoundly anti-Christian (and highly bureaucratic) nature of the Greek academy… as revived by Catholics, and nurtured by Protestants.
As the Humanist Age falls apart and dies, and the heartland of Secular Europe is either dying off, or being taken over by Islam (or, God being merciful, by African Christians — you know, those Christians who actually have children *GASP*), the sterility and intellectual failure of Darwinism becomes apparent.
No doubt, there will be some half-hearted attempt to revive that rotting corpse of Natural Law… but that isn’t going to cut it this time. Sharia beckons, and propping up a skeleton to ward away the beheadings away isn’t going to work.
Secularists are more than willing to kill for a cause… but they aren’t willing to die for it.
Natural Law lacks the authority, strength, and identity to be worth dying for. And in any case, who is to say that one man’s interpretation of Natural Law is any better or worse than another man’s?
Merely pointing out the obvious and scientifically verifiable — that the Creation is an artifact of a super-intelligence — is insufficient for salvation, for law, for life, for society.
The identity of the Creator is needed, as well.
Intelligent Design is necessary, but not sufficient, to establish a Christian society grounded in both just laws and extensive liberty.
Viewing the observable universe does not provide sufficient guidance for salvation. Certain basic truths — suppressed by the ideological commitments of Darwinism — are readily apparent (see: ‘irreducible complexity’), but it just isn’t enough.
You need the Bible. You need a record of God’s actions in the past, and His Law-Word to guide your actions in the future.